tv Washington Journal CSPAN June 27, 2010 7:00am-10:00am EDT
meanwhile admiral mike mullen, the joint chief and today the g-20 summit concluding. and president obama extending an invitation to that's chinese president. >> and "congress is a war zone." we'll read more from that editorial in a moment. as always you can call the numbers for republicans or democratics and our independent line. 3/4.com/c-span wj or send us an email. let's begin with the philadelphia inquirer editorial. we'll go to your call ins about five minutes or so.
some of the biggest challenges facing this nation reducing debt, fixing the social security. reforming immigration policy can't be done unless democrats and republicans work together, yet part sonship is at its worst in decades. they disagree on minor matters much less problems that require hard work and political risk-taking. >> the problem one said, we become much such part son such part son this is the "sunday star." to give you a sense of the security around the g-20 summit taking place. behind the black block is the
headline. meanwhile the toronto sun, the measures to keep things under control and anarchy is from the autoaway sun. 2k34r joining us is marty kruts inninger covering this story. thank you for being with us. guest: good morning. host: i'm going to talk to you about security in a moment but some of the policy coming out of this g-20 summit, it seems president obama wants to spend more and others want to reign in the deficit. so there seems to be a difference between what he wants to do and the other. >> the g-20 summit process was begun in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. where the leaders zided the g-8 letters -- the g-8 leaders
zided they needed more. so they first met in washington in november of 2008. this will be the fourth meeting where the leaders have gotten together. and in the beginning it was pretty easy to reach consensus because fear can drive people to join a common purpose. so a year ago. they were assembling large amounts of stimulus spending. all countries were, to try to jump-start economic growth. that has worked. and the u.s. economy has been growing now for about a year. other countries are growing. a lot of them slower than the united states. but now all that stimulus spending has driven up government deficits and countries especially in europe are worried about a greek style debt crisis so they've begun
reigning in their deficit spending of the new british prime minister, david cam'ron came to toronto after unveiling the most severe of austerity program britain has seen in probably about a half century. so there is a difference of opinion. the administration, the united states believes that we don't want a repeat of the mistake of the 1930's when governments pulled back on stimulus spending too quickly and that just prolonged the great resession. >> we're looking at the canadian prime minister welcoming in the g-8, the president getting the support of the house countries. and they now go to the house and senate. the white house saying that the president wants to sign the measure by the end of this week. has the given him any leverage in term of trying to implement
some of the reforms that are now in place in this country in markets like london and other european countries? >> yes. i think it has. the administration had very much wanted to have that conference committee finished by the time the president came to toronto. and they worked all night, thursday night into sunrise friday morning, and that was accomplished. so he came here able to tell the other countries, look, the united states has is on the verge of passing this sweeping overhaul of its financial regular layings. so we're setting an example, and you need to follow as well. that's one of the issues they are going to be talking about this last day of the summit is financial regulatory reform and how to coordinate the policies in the different countries. >> marty kruts inninger joining us from toronto where the g-20
will conclude. be i the way we'll have coverage. the president heading back to washington, d.c. but i want to show you one of the many photographs of the demonstrations taking place around toronto where the g-20 is occurring and the cost per hour for security according to a story in "the new york times," $12 million per hour making it the most expensive 72 hours in canada's history. >> they are upset. and for a variety of reasons here. this is not unusual. that has become the pattern for these summits. as world leaders gather, that attracts the attention of a global press corps, and also that attracts the attention of demonstrators who are not always happy with what the world leaders are doing.
so they show up here, and that has occurred here as well. security since 9/11 for these events has gotten much, much tighter. all countries spend a lot of money on the security of these events and led some people wonder whether the event itself is worth the cost of the security. but yes. it's an expensive process. i think one estimate there are 19,000 scaurt law enforcement people drawn from all over canada who are protecting the summit sides. >> marty crutsinger, writes for the associated press. at the end of the day was this summit a success for the obama administration? did the president essentially get what he wanted? >> well, i think we have one more day to go before the g-20 joint statement will come out this afternoon. but it looked very much like he didn't get what he wanted in
terms of an agreement that stimulus spending was still the paramount interest that needed to be the focus of various countries. countries are ziding to go their own way in that effort. but the united states is going to sign on to the canadian prime minister harper's goals on deficit reduction. the u.s. was planned -- the u.s.'s plan fits into those goals. but the m fact that he won the big m victory with a conference committee report right before he came to toronto and said ewe'll go to these other leaders and say look what we did on financial regulatory reform. they have to zide what to -- they have to decide what to do.
and credit just froze up for a time. so that's a -- that discussion will happen today. it's likely that they won't reach any final conclusion, but the leaders hope to get momentum to their finance ministers so when they meet again in seoul in november they will be able to sign of an off on an agreement. the overall cost of security takeover last three days in canada, $887 million. marty c crutsinger. joining us from canada, thank you. >> good to be with you. host: the focus for the next 35 minutes or so is this philadelphia inquiror editorial. congress is a war zone. your comments and questions. but first congressman john
spratt is our guest on the 10:00 a.m. show, the chair of the house budget committee and as marty kruts inninger said a key player when it comes to the reform bill now moving through the house and the senate. >> when you go out and talk to folks, what are they asking you? >> jobs, work and the economy. no question about it. that comes ahead of everything else. continually. all parts of my district. i have 14 counties just south of charlotte, north carolina, and columbia, south carolina. stand unemployment inflate almost all 14 has been in double digits for some time now. some as high as more is than 20%ment what we're seeing in my particular district is
contradictlyical unemployment laird on top of structural unemployment. the structural unemployment coming from the textile industry, furniture, other non-traditional industries. >> we're taking it on the chin on top of the contradictlyical effects and probably going to be last recovering the jobs that come with the lag are probably going to be a long lag in our particular case. you hear it everywhere you go in smalltons, large cities wherever it maybe. people are concerned about that. secondly, credit. when you get down to the man on the street. to the builder, the developer, to the small business person, even though we've taken steps to improve the economy. they are only beginning to feel any effects whatsoever from the so called economic recover cri. >> we'll tune in with john
spratt at 10:00 eastern here on c-span. also at 6:00 p.m. this evening. 3:00 p.m. for those of you on the west coast. philadelphia inquiror, congress is a war doan. the ed toirlt points out -- editorial points out it is in the nation's best interest for both parties to work together more often. but how do you foster compromise? anne says congress is more like a standoff between two proxy earms. the g.o.p. for the corporations and demonstrates for the electorate. >> barbara is joining us up early. good morning. caller: yes. i am. host: this is barbara? caller: no. karl. host: go ahead with your comment. caller: yes, i kind of had a little bit of problem with the article, because it did not identify who the real problem
is right now and that's the republicans. host: we'll go to mitch in dallas texas. good morning. independent line. caller: good morning. i agree with the premises to the article and this best solution is for the president and moderate republicans a fairness of the doctrine. because the bottom line troots this problem is that so many elected republicans in congress fear rush limbaugh and talk radio so much that they'll never do anything to work with the president or democrats ever as long as they fear rush limbaugh and shawn hannity so much because these people control the activist base and they are going to get what arlen specter got and charlie crist in florida got. they all know they are going to get that if they don't play ball with rush limbaugh and he doesn't believe in compromise
which is why others apologizeed droll rush limbaugh and on fox news carly fiorina apologized to him on the air because she made a comment he didn't like. host: one more solution from the philadelphiaya inquiror. " more states with non- districting commuents. every 10 years after the census crews states redraw the boundaries of congressional and legislative districts. too often, the process is controlled by bipartisans. creating safe districts that are comforted to conclude more democratic or republican voters. next is bob joining us from harrison, arkansas. good morning. democrats line. >> good morning. >> i think our country is
polarized by the sided issues whether it's abortion, gun rights or -- but the key are our trade policy. and the olympics were held in china years ago. and they were successful. but there were standards in place and if you have a ghobal economy, you should have global standards in your manufacturing. and one of the primary things ought to be unannounced inspections. if you just take the most minimum standards, and the right to work in-state, arkansas. your g.g.p.a. and osha standards are federally mandated. if you don't like the standards, change it. but you don't go for a free market which is really a free for all. and so i wish the tea party people, even our vietnam veterans. wake up. i saw a pair of slacks made the vietnam. think about that. the blood of our soldiers in
vietnam. and yet these politicians will trade our very manufacturing to the very countries that we fought? and there's no give up. in vietnam. the vietnamese. host: but if you take that analogy, we buy german cars and japanese products and we were at war with them in world war ii. >> and they surrendered. germany has standards. so those are the things. china is a communist country. and they have no standards. so those are the things that you should look up what you should do. >> robert. thank you for the call. president hu jintao who is in town for the summit for the obama administration. a date is yet to be set between the two countries. the president extended the meeting and the two were
together again this morning the world's largest and emerging economies at that session. >> next is bob joining us from winter park florida. good morning to you. independent line. caller: hello. host: you're on the air. we'll try one more time. good morning. caller: good morning to you, sir. this is the first time i got through to you. host: well, we are ggad to hear from you. caller: now as far as the congress is at war, i think the whole washington is at war with each other. host: why is that? caller: well, let's face it. i'll start with this. don't you think we should get out of the u.n.? don't you think that it was on the news this morning? because i was up early. and they are talking about these vietnamese fishermen that got off and losing their work and lifelyhood. how about the people for
generations and generations and generations. why do we have to see vietnamese on tv talking about fishing? >> i'm a vietnam vet. and in afghanistan how come we don't use a low nuclear bomb? i don't know if you know about it but there's a bomb for a 30-mile radius. why don't they drop it? host: what about the civilians? caller: tell them to get out. host: republican line. editorial from the philadelphia inquiror, congress is a war zone saying some of the biggest challenges facing this nation, immigration, democrats work together your comment. caller: yes, first of all, i'd like to address the caller from texas who was for the fairness
doctrine, what a freakin' idiot. limit free speech in that's your idea of freedom? what an idiot. i want congress to be a war zone. it's -- obama is a socialist. and he's trying to pass a socialist ajenda. i want the republicans to stand up. -- host: thank you for the call and our comment from the twitter account. the conversation taking part online almost all parties have or will have to form coalitions. sometimes not so in a two-party system. >> we peel have large coverage on c-span there. gipping day one for the kagan hearings. expect it to wrap up by thursday according to patrick leahy. this story at the kagan hearing, the topic may be obama
and roberts. the nominee is usually the star but elena kagan may well be a supporting actress featuring chief justice john roberts jr and bust a many gut. which begins tomorrow to put robers and his court on trial. republicans will put mr. obama on trial in what he views as his big agenda. + and -- independent enough to keep that agenda in check. henry is joining us from hot springs, arkansas. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a comment and a plan. host: ok. caller: i'm going to change the whole perspective on theeterm limits and thousand congress should be run. after the elections, and in all
states and for whatever position in congress, there no longer will be any term onments. they would be put on hourly pay. give them a good hourly pay, but then 2007 privilege and the power to fair to them, if they don't performance well. right now term limits. all these people in congress with the corruption and everything that's going on, we can't fair to them. so if we put them on an hourly pay for a certain length of time or even no length of time, you know? we're not -- we don't have any idea as to how long they have been in office. but if they get an hourly pay,
we, the people, are their customers. and we should have the privilege or fair toing them. and once they get fired, all the people that are with that, will go to the different parties in washington. will not have this civil service waged. host: ok. hnry, thanks for the call. sasha has the comment. six weeks after president obama took office, fox newsal held their first g g.o.p. tea party. now judging yelena inside its publication. she's known for her keen intellect and her ability to reach across the aisle. are they enough to confirm her as the next supreme court justice? around another, kagan is unqualified to sit on the supreme court. republican lawmakers saying kagan has never been a judge or seen the the courtroom from a bench or had a judge's
possibility? any point of law. she's never tried a criminal or civil or even traffic case and not even decided one constitutional issue. by the way we have set up a site where you can keep track of the nomination hearings or begin tomorrow. you can watch the hearings in high-quality wide screen on demand any time and as part of the c-span video library. you can get real-time updateses and also if there are questions as -- related to what is being discussed and you can follow what also is being said on our twitter page. espn.org/kagan. >> george is joining us from mcmurray pennsylvania. democrats line. good morning. caller: thank you how are you? host: fine, thank you. caller: good.
i was watching your program, and you're talking about the partisanship in this congress. it boils down to the fact that the people just can't have a person who is of a different color or race in the white house. it seems to me that as soon as obama became president. and he's a highly intellectual man. i'm white and 83 years old, and i feel he is the only one that now, they keep bringing up, saying reagan. and he eliminated all the men in monopoly laws. h there is no manufacturing. host: mm-hmm. caller: so it's just a matter of hatred under man they wouldn't make up their mind or do anything for him or go along
with anything but they will take credit for their stimulus when you're in their district. anyway, thank you. caller: thank you. some other front page stories i should point out from washington, d.c. it will never be the same. that is alaska's message to the gulf coast. and a story front page of the sunday free necessary detroit, a public duty, a life lived in private. it's a look at congress john conyers and his wife who he has not yet spoken publicly about her condition. she is a former chicago county critical woman and the front page of the "chicago tribune." next is tom from centerville, mastercard, the question we're -- from centerville, mass.
the question we have -- good morning. caller: never have i ever seen the people, the congress, the press, the media so divided across this country. everything seems to be either one side or the other. there is no harmony. there is no unity. to me it's a very sad state of affairs where the public versus private -- and i you can to to many people across the country in my business. everybody has a decisive opinion on what is right or what to do with many, many issues. problem is that our government is not listening to the average person in the country. and the whole argument that we are at war with each other i think is very true.
in a very political sense, but it's time for everybody to lay down their weapons and say let's agree on many things and be feasibility? do you think in this political once again, the country always pulls togethering when they are adverse opponent out in the atmosphere. it doesn't bode well for what has to happen. in order to bring unity, whether it was a 9/11 or major calamity, you know, division is bought about only, i believe, in peacetime. because everything is going so well, everybody seems to be fine, but now it's a greatt greattdivide. host: tom, thanks for the call. inside "the washington post."
kagan's civil rights record is questioned pointing out on the eve of her confirmation hearings her records on race are producing discomfort among some civil rights organizations levering them to struggle about whether they want her to -- in what otherwise has been a low-key partisan debate over kagan's merits. so far no senate democrats have signaled they are waivering on the nomination hearing. subject to a couple of front page stories including the "l.a. times." kagan's not so leftist liberal. this is what it looks like and the "orange county register"ster. kin e again, the confirmation hearings getting underway. michael joining us from philadelphia, the editorial
from the inquirer in that pennsylvania city. good morning to you michael. caller: good morning to you and c-span. the caller from massachusets kind of took the wind out of my sail. patriotism has gone out the window. people are fighting with one another. it's disturbing. one thing i wanted to point out is i have a 30-year-old son whose fighting in afghanistan. and his best friend is black and republican. and my son is a democrat. but they stand shoulder to shoulder. i'm sorry. host: it's ok. caller: and uh, i i can't take it anymore. host: michael how long has your son been in afghanistan? caller: about 1 1/2 years.
host: how much time left on his caller: four months, god willing. host: michael, thank you for the call. then the war in afghanistan is the story front page of the washington post. greg jaffe writing in twin wars, fast exits for top generals trying to put the events of general stanley mccrystal since 2001 a dozen commanders have cycled through the top command. three of those commanders including the recently dismissed stanley mccrystal have been fired or resigned under pressure. two are widely praised with having mastered with the skill that running america's wars demands. it raises a seering question, what is wrong with a system that produces top generals?
today's wars point out that they act like modern viceroys overseeing -- everything. they play dominant roles in the internal politics in the countries where the troopsal fight. also this morning a rare praise from the weekly standard. obama's choice is editorial written by joe crystal beginning this way. let us now praise barack obama, someone should, the left, weary of afghanistan is uneasy about then point to replace general stanley mccrystal since this was not the president laying the ground work for getting out. can't quite bring the themselves to believe the president may actually be doing the right thing. that editorial from the weekly standard. the philadelphia inquiror, congress is a war zone. that's your opinion.
what do you think? caller: hi. thank you for taking my call. host: certainly. caller: right now i'm supporting bobby. and i will call myself a republican. i've been a democrat and independent. i think everybody should take a step back and take a look at what we're doing as a country. glad the hurricane may be going away from mississippi and louisiana. host: sounds like hurricane alex hit the mexican coast eye voiding you completely. caller: right. but all the media will be gone and it will just be us out here on the coast waiting it out. i have to go to church. down here we're having a day of prayer. we all try to get along. i'm a methodist but go to church with catholics and eh, we've always had to get along here and because i was a democrat i voted for obama but before that i voted for bush.
but most are not seeing the -- i'm very despondent and may go back to selling insurance but i was a political science major. but i don't want to go into politics or the media, no offense to you. 3wur it's too anything. i don't know what a role model we are for the future. but if we're all just going to be barbarians why are we even trying to have a civilization? i just think we should get up and take a step back and stop listening to what the media is telling us to do and pray. host: united we stand and divided we shall surely fall. only we can tell the politicians to stop and focus on what we really agree upon. >> northhkorea may transfer power to the son of kim. the tokyo the event that will
take place, north korea announcing yesterday it will hold a rare meeting, the son of ruler kim jong-il of the dictatorship. the korean be found in the a how much section. now to the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning to you. i'm an old guy. and the leadership of the congress is old under the seniorty system. the republican leadership remember well president reagan. and when president reagan dame in, they believed the democrats would never again hold the leadership of the country. they said that many times, and i remember it quite well. and i think they never recovered from the election of bill clinton.
and certainly didn't recover from the second re-election of bill clinton. and i think their entire focus is not unon doing their job but on regaining the leadership of the country. more than anything else, they want that presidentsi, and they are willing to fight the president on any issue at all or on all issues, because -- and to oppose him just so that they can -- defeat him on one issue, crack the success he has had. and finally, get re-elected themselves. >> edward, thanks for the call. about 10 minutes, tony is a contribute roosevelt room. ron, i'm sorry. ross who is with the economic policy substitute the vice
president of that substitute of that institute. both will join us in a couple minutes. the "new york times" sunday magazine has a look at some of the books many of you may be reading. number three is laura bush's book spoken from the heart. michael lewis' book. christoffer hitchen's hitch 22 is number nine and malcolm glad welle's the outliners is number 10. good morning. democrats line. caller: hi, how are you? host: fine. thank you. caller: i just have a couple things to say to address a couple callers i heard. host: sure. caller: the guy in pennsylvania whose son is in afghanistan. who cares if his friend is black and republican. what does color have to do with anything? seriously. are we back in the 1950's? and the guy from mass, he said
everyone pull together like this. but the guy from virginia said he wants congress to be in a war zone. he clearly is the biggest idiot. we're always going to agree to disagree. so we need to be somewhat civil and agree to disagree. host: ok. jennifer, thank you for the call. joe responding to the twitter comment united we stand, divided we fall. joe said that's the problem. we don't agree on anything. on the republican line, good morning, kathy. caller: yes. i was calling about this war zone that the republicans and democrats have. it's rid clubhouse, because they are not the ones that are suffering. it's the people on main street. the unemployed not being able to get their benefits. not knowing if you're going to have the money to pay your power bill or get gas to go to
an interview. these guys need to stop paying drains and focus on what's best for the people of the united states of america. that's what it's all about. >> and i've voted -- they don't stop arguing about being nitpicky with the democrats about what the people need. it has nothing to do with want. it's need. i will not vote republican again. host: let me go back to this editorial rl because they point out one way to end the partisanship is to take a look at congressional redistricting. the example they point out is iowa. iowa uses the -- helped to produce competitive elections. pennsylvania from this editorial, one of the most gerrymandered estate would have to change its system.
the next is gail joining us. good morning to you. caller: two quick comments. first of all, we only have ourselves as americans to blame for the partisanship doubt there. for people like alvin green to be elected in south carolina tells you the voters out there are somewhat ignorant to vote someone like that. so peoole have to put a d or r in front of their name. it only makes sense. secondly, i am as an independent i am happy the republicans are fighting obama right now. because if you look beyond your partisan eyes and say what is he doing? the citizens -- the decisions they have made. is it really helping the economy? if you take an honest look at it, what he's doing is actually making things worse. i say keep fighting because we
need some that look at the interests of the american people, not just the people that support them. >> and responding back and forth between some of our friends saying caller, you missed the entire point but to you race must matter. from his name is no, not again? next is bob. kansas city, missouri. what is your comment is this caller: yes. how are you doing this morning? host: fine. thank you. caller: congress should be a war zone. we're fighting two illegal and immoral wars based on the lie of 9/11. so until they get it straight stnd people are held accountible who commit that had crime, they'll be at war for a long time. look what's happening in the gulf. we have more oil than we know what to do with. host: our address on the twitter account, twitter.comm
c-span wj. good morning to you, elizabeth. caller: good morning, c-span. i just wanted to sy, i'm listening to all these callers. it is appalling to me that race has been the thing that the republicans are being blamed for. everybody says that they can't get along. that is not true. republicans and democrats have ideology that they don't agree with in many issues. they need to work together. yes. my opinion is that both parties have too many old, old-timers in there, and we need to get young, fresh blood. there are many issues in this country today that have never existed for years as long as i can remember. there are differences. and they are genuine in many cases. and i am so tired of hearing the allegiance to rush limbaugh and shawn han ti and whoever.
it doesn't matter. because it's a personal feeling and if they agree with rush limbaugh and shawn hannity, fine. if they don't, that's fine, too. but everybody needs to understand we have differences and believe in certain thing. let's put them together. blend them together and see what happens. >> do you think that will work, though? caller: well, maybe, maybe not, but somebody's got to start it somewhere. that's why i think if we get some new blood in there. there are some people that are running and want to run that genuinely love this country and want to see the best for this country. i personly don't care for the direction that the country's going in right now. i'm nervous about it. host: ok. caller: but he's our president, and i told him he could -- in a
direction the country will be happier with. host: we will keep track of the elections. some of the most competitive governors races around the country. the editorial today congress is a war zone. donna had this comment. it's all a game. they don't care about the people they work for. tina from alex andrea, virginia. caller: yes. i'm calling -- excuse me. i think most of the people calling from the south are very critical of this -- from this administration. they probably go to white house.gov to see the president and his administration is doing for the country. i think if they do that they may change their viewpoint to realize he is working for us, the people. and when people usually say positive things about him, they
are usually calling from the north or out west or some part of the country. but it seems to me that most of the caucasian people in the south in the deep south, especially. they criticize i think you guys should -- in that some time. host: i agree derek says we don't want to be like the nanny state. good morning, rob on the republican line from pittsburgh. caller: good morning. first of all, i'm glad it is a war zone with this president we got. i also want to personally thank everybody calling in that supports obama. i just lost my job because of his policies. i work for an older company, about five people. they can't afford it anymore. it's killing them. they were grooming from the
office in his 30's but 37 people lost their job. now there's a term that then in march and -- all three of them used while they were taking other the country. thank god for useful idiots because these people supporting obama, that's exactly what they are. thank you. host: and from mary, yes, congress is no longer a war zone. by the way if you want to read the editorial. this is what it looks like from page c-4 from the philadelphia inquiror pointing out that congress is a war zone and too little gets done because congress and the guys in the war zone -- some of the other topics and guests on the sunday morning programs and with more on that, bobby jackson and
c-span radio. >> steve, good morning. the topics on the sunday shows will include of course, the change in command in afghanistan and that week's confirmation hearings for general petraeus and elena kagan. also continuing talking about the gulf coast oil spill and the midterm elections. the guest on nbc's meet the proceeds hosted by david gregory includes ranking republican john mccain and california democratic representative barbara lei. on abc's "this week," white house correspondent and host jay tapper will speak with c.i.a. director leon panetta. senate judiciary lindsay gram and dianne feinstein talents chair of the senate intelligence economy, on fox news sunday former arkansas governor, mike huckabee.
on face the nation on cbs. you'll hear host bob schieffer, and senate judiciary committee patrick leahy and host canny will talk to guests including texas senator john cornyn. he's chair of the senate oirl committee. and chair of the democratic campaign committee. jack reed. democrat frl road island. you can listen to all five of the sunday morning talk shows starting at noon eastern on c-span radio. that's 90.1 f.m. here in washington, d.c. and nationwide on xm satellite channel 132 and live on the web at c-span.org and you can also follow us on facebook and on twitter. >> c-span is now available in over 100 million homes,
bringing you a direct link to public affairs, politics, history and non-fiction books all as a public service, created by america's companies. >> of course, the lotry is prescribed by law if demand outpaces supply, you have to do a lottery. >> i really think this is the civil rights issue of today, and it's not just about race. i mean, it's about class. >> tonight the lottery producer director madeline sackler on the family she chronicled hoping to and tone -- at 8:00 eastern on company's -- let me say to the american people, this is a change in personnel but not a change in policy. general petraeus fully participated in our review last fall. and he both support and helped design strategy that we have in place. >> learn more about the president's choice to head u.s.
forces in afghanistan. general david petraeus has been on c-span more than 40 times. watch his appearances at events online any time at the c-span video library. it's washington, your way. >> starting monday watch the hearings for elena kagan. and see re-airs every night at 9:00 eastern on c-span two. to learn more about the nation's highest court, read c-span's favorite book. candid conversation with all the justices. providing uniqueness about -- "washington journal" continues. host: as the g-20 summit wraps up in front and we focus on the reform bill going to the house and senate this week. our two guests talking about
the economy and definite spending and where the world stands world bide. with the economic policy institute the vice president of that institute, thank you for being with us and tony fratto contributor of cnbc. thanks for being with us. >> thank you, steve. host: you posted that financial regulatory reform bill -- guest: one is the fact that so much regulatory discretion was left to the regulators that we're going to see three or four years going forward. i think of this as a full employment bill for lobbyists and lawyers for financial firms working with the regulators to find out exactly what the legislation means for them and that's one part of it. the second part is to some degree what the u.s. congress was focused on here was an all of a sudden believe that our
financial system stops at our borders. and as we know this is an enormous global financial system where cross-border transactions are measured in the trillions of dollars, and we need to start the work on global financial regulations and standards for banks that are involved in cross-border transactions. the one thing that's fairly ar cane, but the leaders need to focus on now and i believe come to a resolution in november is on the definition of capital. if we're going to set standards, we're going to talk about appropriate levels of lopes and liquidity, we can get into that -- it was left to them to deal with, but we need the heads of state to encourage quicker action now and come to a resolution at the g-20
meeting in november. host: there's also the complex rule, we covered all of them. can you plain the sfans? >> well, derivatives are bets. they are -- they cover an enormous range of things. you can have derivatives on everything from the weather to the price of sugar a year from now. the price of gasoline a year from now. if you're an airline, it's sort of an insurance policy where if you're worried the price of gas is going to be up and it's going to cut into your profit, then you take a position on gasoline. and you try to make money against that rising price. so this has become a market of -- that's been unregulated. there's no trance parentsy in
the market. and it's hundreds of trillions of dollars, perhaps. ip, no one really knows full extent of it. so a market that big and that unregulated can cause -- who should be making these bets? what should be the rules for making the bets? should there be a market where everybody can see the price of these derivatives? and to make it very clear, when investors are investing in a bank, for example, that they know what that bank's position the with regards to derivatives. it's a huge issue and congress really just took the first step. and there was an attempt to keep banks out of the derivativesal market, and --
host: in the new york times, here's the president's signature and we'll start the countdown for -- including the federal deserve and securities and exchange commission and the federal deposit insurance corporation. when the bankers convened there was still plenty of time to lobby kong, but the group's president and its board board of directors told the group that they should shift its focus on the rule making process and the lobbying gets underway. >> i think that's right. i think all of the parties who were interested in this legislation understood in the last few weeks. especially when once they got into conference as to what the final legislation would look like, made a determination that we've got to fight the next battles. and i think that's what you'll
see them doing and possible some technical corrections to this legislation. we know when congress writes complex legislation, and i'm trying to think of and can't come up with another piece of legislation sweeping and dealing with more complex issues than this, we know there are going to be mistakes and unintended language and unintended consequences. this is something we saw, by the way, for example, with a relatively more narrow bill. the sarbanes oxly bill we passed during the bush administration. dealing with a fairly narrow topic of company accountability. and we dealt with unintended consequences and disconnect between the way firms are regulated here in the united states versus the way they are regulateed in europe and other parts of the world. and we had to deal with those issues for a number of years. so we know some of that is going to come out of this legislation, too. it's very, very broad.
the breadth 06 this bill is breath taking. host: it's said president obama wants more countries to spend more money to great jobs and global growth. but david camron of great britain and os saying we can't spend more. we got to bring down our own deficit. so can you plain the difference between the spending and reduction? guest: the biggest world economy problem is there was this tremendous loss of wealth in the world because of the subprime disaster both in the stock markets around the world and in housing markets. trillions and trillions of dollars were lost. so that took from the world economy a lot of consumer demmnd. and so all of the economies around the world, with the exception of china, maybe, had been struggling.
so what do you do to replace that lost demand? how do you stim late the economy and put people back to work. in the united states we have $15 million people unemployed. how do you get those people back to work? and if consumers don't have the wherewithal to go to the markets themselves to buy things, the only answer is the government has to step in. and the government has to spend on infrastructure, spend on education, spend on supports for all the people who are out of work. that's what obama's asking for. unfortunately, as you say, a number of the european countries are plunging into the same mistake that hoover and the united states economy did during the great depression. they are confronted with this resession. rev knews are falling for the
for the government so deficits are naturally rising. their answer is to step back, cut back on government spendture which means businesses have fewer customers, more people will be unemployed. and the cycle will continue. host: in the latest edition of the national journal it says jitters over the austerity plan. announcing their plans to account their bunl etc and quote the economist who says german austerity will worsen the crisis in the euro area. >> well, he has had this view that government needs to come in and fill this hole that ross had described. and that's, you know, that's an important question to discuss, and with respect to the germans. well, dr. crugman and the obama administration taking a look at europe. it seems they haven't been
paying attention to what europe has gone through over the past six months with respect to their fiscal policies and the reaction from markets. it's not that european countries with the exception of germany, which has a long tradition of austerity and hard money and balanced budgets. it's part of the fabric of that nation, the way they think of themselves. . .
>> europe has a very real structural problem that is hampering their ability to deal with these kinds of issues in the midst of financial and cyclical downturns. guest: we are a thing tent that focuses on labor problems. host: you have this chart that focuses on recovery and job growth before and after recovery. what do you attribute this to? guest: this is one of the most important single pictures you can have of what happened in the economy. starting at the start of the recession in december, 2007, the beginning of job losses that ended up at 700,000 per month the economy cratered all of that demand. $12 trillion was lost in housing
and the stock market. businesses laid people off as a result. in february of 2009, we had the stimulus billrou which started pumping government money back into the economy. immediately it started slowing the job losses and you can see that the result is not just that they had been slow but they had been reversed and we now conomy.n reversed and we now without that, government stimulus, we would have a continued decline of the red ink of continued job losses. there is no question about what saved the american economy, it was the government intervention. host:il room? guest: it is a hobby for me.
it is a website where i have a place to put some of my riding that i was not necessarily going bc.com and i opened it up to all bush administration officials, former bush administration officials on the debate. they had their own blogs and were doing television appearances. we aggregaae everything they do. ,6evsome people do original wrg for the website as well. you have all these officials who have a viewpoint, a talent and have left government and have some comment on the current policy debate. i would have liked to have seen the current -- the clinton -- former clinton administration people do this as well and how
t#/policy is actually made. they are at the roosevelt room table making policy and we would one easy place to find out what they have to say about these issues. host:çvjo do you think of the oa administration is reading your views? guest: i don't know. >host: how often do you contribute? guest: irregularly. host:tñ" we will take your phoe calls. stanley, from south carolina, good morning. caller: i have been listening into the conversation. i believe that the president -- we have to spend money to get folks back to work. we have to/+mxñ stimulate the economy. 2áwki believe that we will brig
down the deficit when folks get back to work by them spending money,au0-v bringing taxes intoe economy. that is how i think the deficit -- how we will decrease the deficit. of view?ur response to his poine guest: on the need to spend to be able tooffill this call -- i have never been big on deficit and spending. there are natural need from time to time to have deficits. an ecoc downturn, isl) think you want o have things to put to into a deficit to deal with a downturn.
i also don't mind borrowing for investment in the future that will result in a greater return to the general economy and government. the problem is when you are borrowing for consumption, present-day consumption, you lose that multiplier in the future and you didn't get the return you need. stimulus spending -- the question is never whether federal spending into the economy palms that money into into the economy with low rates of borrowing. the question was whether it was sustainable and whether the economy would pick up on its own. i wrote this a year ago. the question is not whether you will have some job creation and economic activity when the federal government becomes $900 -- dumped $900 million into the
economy. the question is whether the economy will be self sustaining and be able to run on its own legs. that is not what we are seeing right now. you can take a look at the chart that russ put up in recent levels of job growth that are not government jobs, we are seeing a reduction in job growth and very, very high levels of weekly unemployment claims that may be the most stubborn statistic out there for economists. it is a very, very stubborn we have to figure out what is going on with that part of the job market. host: you are a graduate of the university of pittsburgh.
let me pointxeç>÷ol= out one h- it is spending on local spending plummeted. they spend on roads, schools, all construction products so fast that federal stimulus money has that been able to fill in the gap. >guest: this is the biggest single problem over the next year. state and local governments have a budget gap of $125 billion in the year ahead. it is not just that they are stopping projects, they will be laying off hundreds of thousands of workers including probably 300,000 education workers, teachers and school personnel. starting a this fall. when that happens, that will do real damage to the economy. only congress can do anything about this. the states are forced to balance their budgets. they cannot borrow.
they cannot do deficit spending. if congress does not pass legislation they are considering now to inject money#h to pay fr teachers and to help the states with medicaid expenses and other expenses that will keep people employed, we will see a sharp drop in employment. we will see unemployment at about 10% i predict. host: we have a link to our guests' website. in our last hour, we talked to jennifer who turned to twitter after the call in on the air. [laughter] laguna, calif., getting up early is next. guest:keynesian economics has never worked in terms of 3=x.
riú&going back to fdr and his nw deal, the average unemployment rate during that time from 1933- 1940 was 17% despite the most vigorous application of keynesian economics. the most successful example was warren harding and the depression of 1920 which is not part of the debate. the decline in national income was almost the same, not quite, as the great depression. in terms of national income. unemployment rose quite a bit, too. warren hiding slashed$,6 govert spending almost in half and slashed taxes. and the result was the roaring '20s when unemployment got down
to 1.5%. my question is, how well as the national press done its job in terms of educating the american public, in terms of the efficacy of the two different approaches, the libertarian approach that warren harding used versus the keynesian approach of fdr. ? guest: most of the press have a keyneeian view of the world where they cannot understand how you can generate growth with government spending or some kind of fiscal stimulus. they are far less understanding of dealing with business cycles and the influence of monetary policy. that needs to be part of the discussion for th. i spent time looking at what the
fed is doing and the impact of monetary policy on our economy. they have enormous challenges getting that policy correct. as we went through the financial crisis, they navigated through uncharted waters in terms of dealing with the crisis. now, theyyhave a great deal of risk going forward. they have to get the policy right in terms of the magnitude of what the policy rate should be, how quickly you should get there, the general outlook on the economy. i tried to give people a good sense of how difficult this job is and to think about getting policy right for the future. everyone makes estimates of what gdp will look like. i remind them that -- on friday we just had a new number come out, taking a look at the final estimate for gdp which was
revised down to 2.7%. that was the third estimate for that quarter. it took us three estimates to get it right and that was for the quarter behind us, not for the quarter looking for. everyone should take estimates for growth and job creation with a grain of salt. host: this is an e-mail saying what is the point of having a roundtable with "soft speaking easygoing types? where do you guys agree? guest: we disagree about the role of government right now. he is not an ideologue about this. you don't have a choice when you have a 50 million people unemployed. you have to spend money to help them. all of those families will have a financial wild. we are in a situation where we don't have a welfare program that can help them get up -- get
employed. if they lose employment, they could lose their houses or get kicked out as renters. there are food stamps available to keep them from starving, but there is one job for every five unemployed workers right now. if the government does not step in to help them we will have a disaster on our hands. this is the first time i have heard warren harding praised for his economic policy. his administration was known for scandals. the result of what he called the libertarian policy was not a sustainable recovery. the eight years after he took office, we have the great depression. we have host: the debate going on. guest: in defense of this, you'd
never build this as "crossfire." guest: most of the press has -- host: most of the press is reporting that the deficit is the worst thing ever. hugh is joining us from asland, virginia. guest: i would like to give you a reference from a "wall street journal" article from 1983. you can in google creativity 777.com. web sites have the opportunity to transform the entire global business environment if they are utilized correctly. host: john is joining us from
abbeyville, south carolina, democrats line. caller: i want to comment about the article on the war in congress. i am a victim of this war. my unemployment will be cut off. i wish that the people in washington were fighting for my position. host: we were focusing on the editorial that congress is in a war zone and nothinn can get done unless both parties can get along. guest: letting unemployment insurance benefits lapse now when there are five unemployed people for every job vacancy is pretty close to criminal, in my view. i would like to see and i hope
it is the case that finally the majority leader would take a bill to extend unemployment benefits and get that bill passed and then they could go back and fight about everything else that they disagree about. i hope both parties would agree that we cannot let families just fall off the cliff with no help which is what is happening now. benefits have been cut off, extended benefits have been cut off for almost one month now. there are people who are still getting them, but people who have been unemployed for six months and there are almost 7 million of them, will no longer get benefits, people who go past the six-month mark will be cut off. it is hard to be cut off right now. that will be terrible for their 7ú.hcommunities, local business, and obviously for them and their families. host: another article says the
state and local officials are competing for financial health. in congress they respond quickly and positively with no at -- aid and the debt is $16 trillion and growing. guest: i remember during the bush administration that larry summers went up to congress and testified on the problems caused by ending deficits which at that time were in the $300 billion range. he talked about crowding out the long-term impact and we are now seeing the deficits at five times that rate.
with unemployment benefits, that was an effort that senator snowe made to senator reid that they stand alone. if you go around the country and talk to people, they are beginning to be concerned about not just the amount of federal spending of bay are saying and a sizeable deficit but also the extended unemployment benefits among some parts of the population. they are wondering how long is too long? to have that discussion on a stand-alone bill i think would be wise. we need to have a national discussion. with respect to states, i have some sympathy for state because the federal government over the years has been in a difficult situation where we create structural problems for states
in economic downturns. the federal government great programs and they sharekuñ9 thet of some of these programs with the state. the federal government says it is a great program and you'll get it for 50 cents on the dollar. the governors tell their constituents this. what happens in economic downturns like recessions is that states do not have the ability to go out and make up for lost revenue to pay for those programs were those programs increase because they are stabilization programs. the cost increase during an economic downturn and states are reliant on taxes and other taxes that decline in general terms. they cannot go out and borrow money at the same amount or the
same rate that the fed or the federal government can. the governor has to go and knock and doors on congress and beg the setting administration for funding to make up for that call. that is an -- for that hole. i would like to see how we rationalize the relationship with the states for these programs. guest: the biggest contributor is medicaid. the problem is that we do not have national health insurance. that would save the states from this problem. germany does not have to worry about this in a recession because they have national health insurance. france and some of the other countries that to mentioned earlier are considering something that looks more austere in their budgets. they are not talking about cutting back on their health insurance programs. that is just fundamental to how they deal with the economy and
people's needs. it is a tremendous problem for the state's right now. they cannot come up with the money, but they have the obligation to cover health insurance for the poor. that is what federal aid right now is so critical. there is a bill that started at $25 billion and congress has cut it back to about $16 billion. if congress does not send that money to this date, we will have the consequences that we talked about earlier. host: we are having a round table on the economic situation in the u.s. say happy birthday to tony fratto. guest: it is my birthday and i don't normally recognize it publicly and i try to keep it quiet. guest: facebook makes it impossible to keep your birthday secret.
it seems that everybody knows this. thank you. for recognizing my birthday. host: thank you for joining the conversation on our tour page. caller: happy anniversary of your birth pare. how would like both of your insight. i know i am slow mentally. i am not the only person in america that is. i am not good with the arithmetic and we are discussing the economy. we cannot subtract the policies that the bush administration has inflicted into the economy. give me your suggestions.
with the legislation vetch's past -- with the legislation back just passed, obama went to the g-20 cas you have to spend t was taken out of the economy or put it back into it. you have to inject a transfusion if the country is hemorrhaging. with the work that is going on in congress, although we have people listing disclosures, campaign disclosures, would you say that president obama and the tarp you brought up earlier, is it a reaction from the
administration? guest: yes, we cannot figure out where to go if we do not realize where we have been. we have been recovering from the worst financial crisis in 75 years. we lost $12 trillion worth of wealth that. has led to a decline in economic activity. you don't know for how long. it is hard to be sure. it took a big ball of of the economy. it led to 8 million jobs lost. we are starting to restore them. it will be a long time before we recover fully from that. i think the bush administration
policies were responsible in part for that. it was your watch when this occurred. what we need to talk about is what do we do going forward. you can see that the financial industry took too much out of the real economy. main street did not get the funds it needed because of the financial speculation. this bill will help. it probably will not rain in wall street and the financial sector as much as it needs to we cannot have an economy where people make a most of their money by paper transactions that do not create real wealth. we need to support manufacturing and the real economy. host: the president is staying the weekend in toronto for the g-20 summit. early friday morning at 5:20 a.m., but congress will vote on
the reform -- financial reform bill. the president talked about it. >> i have to tell you why these and forms are important. we are still digging ourselves from an economic crisis that happened because there was not strong enough oversight on wall street. we cannot build a strong economy in america over the long run without ending the status quo. we need to lay a new foundation for growth and prosperity. that is what the wall street reform is currently making its way through congress will help us do. these are reforms that represent 90% of what i propose when i took up this fight. we will put in the strongest consumer financial protection in history and create an independent agency with an independent director and an independent budget enforcement. credit-card companies can no longer ms. levy was fine print. you will no longer be subject to all kinds of hidden fees and penalties. predatory practices will be gone.
host: some of the details of the bill? guest: there is a lot in this bill and a lot that is left out that we need to pay attention to. it left out any treatment fannie mae and freddie mac which are huge contributors to the housing bubble and the financial crisis. it does not take a strong look at credit rating agencies which were a strong player in the buildup of the housing bubble. i will take all the responsibility for the financial crisis. you can put it all on my shoulders as a former member of the bush administration. we know it was very complex. at this point in time, one year and a half into the obama administration, they have their hands on the wheel and we can take a look at their economic policy going forward and make our best judgments on whether it
will help or not. i think it is a mixed bag right now. host: if unemployment babbitt's dol,l not get extended, watch te economy crash over the -- it's a compliment benefits do not get extended, watch the economy crash all over again. caller: good morning. i am confused about the subject of infrastructure spending. i seem to see a resistance. to this spending. i hear that it is difficult politically. i hear pork spending and that sort of thing. people sort of push it aside. i also remember the discussions for the last, it seems the
decades to the crumbling bridges and we have to upgrade the air control system in this country. i know these are large subjects and projects but there are also small projects like roads in the smallest village to the biggest city, state, and federal level. i don't know much -- what money we got for the money in iraq and afghanistan. i know we got some. the money we spend on these projects would return direct revenue to the government in the form of taxes at every level. this would be from in come to taxes. there are projects that have been sitting on the shelf with dust on them at all these levels. i am sure that if you just get
them get out and ready to go, if you get them going, i would imagine that they would begin production at caterpillar and various materials companies. it would get money flowing in this economy and that seems to me to be the thing that we need to get done here. guest: i am surprised this is a republican call. i agree completely. we have a problem for years ahead, the debate about whether these projects are shovel-ready or what should we be funded infrastructure? i think we need to invest -- as long as we are discharging pollutants into water, we should put more money into clean water. we should spend on high-speed
rail like china. our passenger rail system is kind of a joke compared to the rest of the world. we have bridges better on say if all over the country. our infrastructure needs our way into the trillions. we have 2 million construction workers unemployed and we should be putting them back to work. host: i hate to stun him on his birthday. democrats' line, welcome to "washington journal" caller: welcome to your guests and happy birthday to one of them parabola. i was listening to both of them talk and they seem to have more
intelligence about this than anybody in washington, d.c. including our president who is very bright. isn't this about two different economic policies, they won with the triple down and the other with the democratic view? didn't this start with ronald reagan? didn't he say for us not to have any restraint on business but with the restraint on the people, i.e. a person going fishing in the gulf of mexico could only catch so many fish. that is what i mean by the different economic models when
they relate to the economy and restraints on businesses and people. guest: thank you for the happy birthday wishes. we know that government can spend money and we know that it can -- by spending that money you keep some people employed. the question that we want to know is whether we are creating sound footing for the economy going forward. we7t
to be. their energy costs are today more expensive and could be more expensive going forward. their cost of benefits are more expensive going forward. the cost of capital, the money that they need to borrow in order to buy the equipment, the caterpillar heavy piece of equipment that you wanted with an american sitting on doing it road project has become more expensive. what happens with profits after you have done all that and taken risk and created a job at created economic activity is that the profit you take some that are being taxed, you have limited the incentive for that individual to go out and create that economic activity. all of us sit here in washington and wonder why the private sector is not creating jobs. i believe that we do need to
have very rational regulation of our economy. we need to have a rational tax system that is fair. i even believe in a progressive tax system. that might offend some of my republican friends out there. i think we will test the limits. it looks like we will test the limits of where -- of what is too high a tax policy to extract and what is too restrictive of regulatory policy. that is something we will be looking at for the next couple of years. host: you were talking about the year to year deficit which is in excess of $13 trillion. what happens when interest on the debt outpaces revenue? guest: that would be a very serious problem. we are nowhere close to that.
there is a lot of fear more during -- there is a lot of fear mongering but we're not close to that problem. our deficit right now, half of it is because of the recession. half of the deficit is from our annual budget deficit is from the decline in revenues from less business activities and the extra spending that needs to be done. that is automatic to stabilize this. if we can stabilize the economy and put people back to work, we automatically cure half of the annual budget deficit problem. we need to focus on that. the other half comes from the enormous tax cuts that were passed in the bush administration. they are gigantic.
the damage that they have done to the federal budget deficit continues. it goes forward until congress finally reverses those tax cuts which i hope happens sometime in the next year. host: jim is joining us from new hampshire, good morning. caller: it is not my birthday but i think you have given the nation the best possible un- birthday present in the stability of this discussion. i don't know why we cannot achieve that more nationally. i was always pleased with mr. fratto when he appeared in press conferences. his predecessor set my teeth on edge. i turned in later for this. i have heard mostly democrats say that $1 in unemployment
yields $5 to the larger economy. guest: that's just not true. there are questions about what the multiples are. i think it was actually a- multiplier. -- i think was actually a- multiplier. -- i thank was actually negative multiplier. guest: it is one of the most positive things the government can spend on now when unemployment is as high as it is now. host: can the government afford to support the unemployed until the economy strengthens? am i my brother's keeper? guest: that's what i was getting
at earlier. there are some questions out there -- we started out with initial unemployment at 26 weeks and we are now up to 99 weeks. that is about two years of being on unemployment and that is giving many americans a great deal of concern. are we creating a perpetual system of economic support for the unemployed? host: extending unemployment benefits would have created a low percentage of the overall debt. guest: that is one element. we ccn talk about any individual program in terms of what that individual program or that individual extension of a program will add to the debt or the deficit. the problem is that we need to look at the government in
totality and not at any individual program. they are all important. budgeting is all about setting priorities and making hard decisions. if you cannot make our decisions on programs then you'll never get to anything close to balance. that is the goal of the nation to get to that point. the question is not -- if we say we collectively agree that extending unemployment benefits is the highest priority, something on that list is lowest priority. congress asked for pasygrules wd not add to the deficit. we should not fund programs in order to pay for the things that are our highest priority. guest: congress made exceptions
for emergencies, specifically emergency spending for unemployment. it was not part of paygo but we talk about austerity and germany. their basic unemployment benefit goes for two years. the difference is, they have chosen to pay for it. they made the decision that this is important and they will pay for it. they have higher income taxes than we do. they have a different model where they do believe we are in this together and they will not believe -- they will not let families fall into poverty because of a general economic decline. host: can you stay for a few more minutes? guest: yes, germany is a good example for us. you cannot compare them to the united states because the model in germany is you are paying people to stay on their jobs.
the government subsidizes their income so they are on the job, retaining their skills and ready to go back to work. this is a great concern from an economist looking at this. what is happening to americans who are this long unemployment? we have a record number of americans who are considered long-term unemployed. every day that they remain long- term unemployed, they become less employable. that is a permanent cost to the productivity capacity of the nation. this is very concerning so we need to find ways to get this population back to work as quickly as possible because you do not get those skills back. host: someone is referring to obama with his fake spending. he is neglecting to help america. the republican line from
indiana, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a conservative, far right kind of fellow and conservative would spend it. the one thing i think we could all -- that i hope we could all come to agreement on is that the government takes to dollars of my guess is -- paycheck and thee obligation to spend that privilege. until we realize that the america that we used to have is no longer here and the america we used to live high on august changing, until we change as a nation and adapt to that, we will continually have these crazy ideas of all let's spend more money and that should fix it. i submit that we should take farmers, construction workers, assemblymen and put them in charge of the government because they will have a much more better common-sense approach. until we get to that point and realize that if you have to
dollars you cannot spend $3 and break this all nonsense of republican and democrat -- stop spending money. i submit this one last leg. the government cannot create anything. they are a collector of money and they are drunken sailors that spend it. if you want to fix the economy, cut all business taxes in half. tell tte world that bacon come to america and you can build your companies and higher the greatest honor for divorce and workers in the world. common sense -- when you have too many people who do not do things like working on cars or planting crops -- when you have people who sit around and talk instead of producing something we will never fix this problem. host: you sound like a member of the tea party group. caller: i am so far passed that movement for so many years.
we get into these little labels. we hold our flags. i am a proud american. i served this country. i am proud patriots. i love our country. i despise the government and the progressive idea. this goes past republican and democrat, they are all the same period host: thank you for your call and your point of view. that will be a dividing line in the midterm election. guest: i think he needs to read more history. he could start by reading the history of the lincoln administration back in the 1800's when the government -- he says the government does not create anything. the government actually funded the entire development of the u.s. rail system. we -- the taxpayers paid businesses to lay track and connect the east and west.
the government build the interstate highway system which led to a tremendous increase in economic growth. through the gi bill, the government paid for the education of the veterans returning from world war two which led to -- the returns on investment, people have estimated them as high as $8 for every $1 invested. you can take that kind of view, but we would not have the united states that you think you remember. we would have to have had a much poorer countries. it is hard to argue about this. host: kentucky, good morning to you. caller: i would like to ask mr. fratto and all the republicans out there one question. if the government did not do what they did with the banking
and general motors and all of that and they did not bail these people out, where do they think we would be today? guest: i may be the last living supporter of the financial rescue program. it might be just me and and recalls sen. -- it might beat me and hank paulson. you and i would agree that we would have seen something very like the great depression with unemployment at stratospheric levels and may be double the loss of wealth that was being estimated earlier. had we not on the financial rescue to protect the financial system. not to bail out any particular
firm but to shore up the capital you and i agree on that. host: you brought up something earlier that most of these long- term unemployed will never find a job making as much money as they were with the cutbacks in benefits and so forth? guest: that is true. that is always the case with dislocated workers. when they find a job, it is usually the case where 3/4 find a job, but most of them it takes them 10 years to return to the levels of earnings and benefits they had originally. host: why give up the benefits for less money if you're going to get a job that means less than what you are going to get unemployment? guest: the view of the unemployed is wrong. they are desperate to find jobs. there are people that do not get benefits if they are not seeking work.
that is the first thing. they have to be actively looking for work. many of these people have them lookingñr for a 90-95 weeks. insurance benefits tomorrow,nt%- what would happen? all of those people would lose the income that they have, but it would not create a single job. there are five unemployed for every job vacancy. it would do no good at all and would in fact hugely damage the economy. host: another twitter commented -- do you tweet tax guest: i made very, active trader. i think it is one of the best ways to stay in contact with people around the country. i have met some of the very best and smartest people out there that i otherwise would not have met and i keep in touch with many of my former friends in the white house press corps and the
national press corps and internationally. on various issues. i have all my pittsburgh steelers and penguins fans that i keep in touch with three twitter. i love twitter. twitter/tonyfratto if you want to stay in touch. guest: i should give our website which is epi.org. our institute tweets but i do not. host: we will go to carl in philadelphia. caller: good morning, gentlemen, how are you? let's examine how we got to where we are. look at housing. it was statuary to inflation.
more and more dollars chasing goods and services. when you have inflation going 5%-8% for years on end, your job -- job growth vanishes and your industrial base goes away. the government ends up like an octopus with its tentacles and everything in order to try to keep the thing afloat. until we control inflation which is the root cause of why we are where we are, this will continue and it will get worse until the currency itself becomes a perpetuation of continued economic decline. do you want to respond? guest: we have a different set of facts. tony would agree that in fact we don't have inflation. to% inflation is very low. that is what -- two% inflation
is very low. for the last decade, inflation has averaged less than 3%. guest: does not really an inflation issue. people question the value of the dollar. going into this crisis and starting from the mid-1990's, we were in maybe the most unique benign economic environment of all of human history which was very low inflation and very low interest rates. looking back, we wonder why that was the case. we thought we had conquered inflation and maybe we have, but we are not seeing it now. host: did tony fratto just admit that if george but bush had done
nothing, we would have had another great depression? guest: if you don't $900 billion -- if you dump $900 billion into the u.s. economy, that will have an impact. that was never a question. the question was whether that was sugar for the economy or whether it was the good food staples we know the economy needs to be healthy and a self sustaining on its own going forward. what we have seen is that most of the spending was on sugar and not on good sound fundamental investments that would increase productivity and growth in the future. host:gw spend lots of money and lost many jobs guest: that is
the record of what has happened in this recession. the ttarp was actually a bush administration proposal. congress and the obama administration and the president continued it because, as we agree, if something was not done, we would have had a -- we have a catastrophe in my view that is twice as bad. one place where we disagree which is worth noting is that as part of the tarp, the government bailed out the oil industry. it said the auto industry from going down the tubes. i think this is an unheralded accomplishments. general motors is selling cars
again. it is profitable. instead of closing all its factories or nearly all of its factories and, incidentally, causing the suppliers to go out of business which would have damaged ford and the japanese transplant companies as well, we now have a reinvigorated u.s. auto industry because the government intervened and let the money when they needed it and forced a restructuring that would definitely needed. it is an example of government helping business. and helping a the economy. host: let's go to the republican line, last call, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am a 55-year old lady on unemployment now for almost one year.
i keep hearing that we cannot get this bill passed or it was not passed because the republicans. i have almost lost everything. my home, everything i have because of this and to hear that it will not be extended is absolutely -- i cannot sleep or anything because of best. host: you have been out of work for just under two years? caller: just under one year. host: what did you do before that? caller: i was mainly going to school to get a degree. host: how much money or you learned before you were laid off? caller: about $45,000. host: what are you getting on unemployment? caller: $360 per week. host: what is your area of expertise? caller: in the health field. host: do you own or rent? caller: i own my home.
host: you have children? caller: 11 children. --two children. it is a done deal or where do we go from here. what do we do now? guest: there is hope. there are 15 million people unemployed right now and 8 million more for working part time. i hope all of those people will contact their members of congress and tell them that you cannot do that to us. this is wrong. congress has these bills and they have not voted them down. the republicans have blocked them. they have taken up by a bill which includes many other things. the deduction that people have for paying state and local taxes has to be renewed each year and
that is in the bill. there are research and development tax credits and many other things in this bill which make it desirable, but personally, i would like to see the unemployment insurance provision dealt with as quickly as possible. that should be extended not for one month or six months, but for one year. we know this is a problem that will go on for at least one year. it should be done right away. guest: republicans offered an extensive unemployment benefit that was paid for. both parties on capitol hill right now want to extend it. my message to the caller is that my expectation is that one way or another it will get extended. we need to have a conversation about the other issues and how we deal with these problems long term. if you are in the health-care industry, we will be spending a
couple of trillion dollars more than we thought we would in the next couple of decades. i think you are in a growth industry and i am hopeful that you will be able to find a job. host: russ eisenbray is a contributor to the huffington post website. tony fratto is the former press secretary to president bush. please come back again we had hoped that the state senator would join us to talk about the arizona emigration law. we hope to reschedule him for another day. we will take a short break and look at the events of the past week. . .
>> "washington journal" continues. host: we're going to open our phone lines. it is a chance for you to talk about the news of this past week or look ahead to the week ahead. we will have the nomination hearings getting underway tomorrow for elena kagan to root so -- to replace the social justice john paul stevens. there is an article about elena kagan, known for her keen intellect and her ability to reach across the aisle. it is not enough to confirm or as the next supreme court justice? there is another story "kagen is unqualified to sit on the u.s. supreme court." ted poe says elena kagan has never been a judge, never seen the courtroom from the bench, never had the judge's responsibility, never instructed
the jury, never made any point of law. she has never tried a criminal, civil, or even a traffic case. she has not decided any constitutional issues. tuesday, the confirmation hearing for general david petraeus. the weekly standard -- obama finds a general. there's an editorial supporting the confirmation. that hearing begins on tuesday morning at 9:30. we will be covering both of these events. the elena kagan hearings continue through thursday. we have a special web site that will allow you to watch the hearings in a number of different ways. c-span.org/kagan. live coverage begins at 12:30 tomorrow. there is background and links to many documents. we will discuss many of the terms that will be coming up in the questioning of elena kagan. you may not be familiar with these terms. we will do so in real time.
check it out online c-span.org. theresa, from las vegas, go ahead. caller: i have a general comment. thank you, c-span. it is early. whenever there are guests, specifically talking about financial industry, financial reform, i would love to get some background, specifically about what they or their group or their people -- were they were during the bubble or before -- where they were during the bubble or before the crash. i would like to know if they were people or had associates who had red flags. that is something, for me, i find really important to know before -- regarding credibility of people that i am listening to
now. but they are talking about what their opinions are and what should be done. i tend to not find people really credible who claim to be experts and who did not seem to know what was going on before the crash. host: thank you for your call. as a result of what happened on wall street, a lot of changes in the financial, regulatory reform bill. the house and senate conferees wrapped up business at about 5:20 on friday morning. this morning, on the finance bill, the lobbying shifts the regulations -- the lobbying shifts to regulations. the bill completed early friday and expected to come up for a final vote this week is basically a 2000-page missive to federal agencies instructing regulators to address subjects regulating -- subjects from derivatives to document
retention. it is notably short on specifics, giving regulators a good and power to determine its outcome. -- a good chance and the power to determine its outcomes. caller: thank you, c-span. i enjoy you and susan and all of the rest. i just wanted to say something about that last couple that you had on there. the problem in our society right now is too much government. city, state, county, federal -- it is just too much government. mr. eisenbrey, he was a socialist. you could tell. it was clear to me. mr. fratto was a republican in name only. it seems like most of the people
that call in on our democrat line -- you can tell they are -- host: i have to stop you there. that is not necessarily true. caller: what i am saying is we have too much government. if you want to much government, look at the socialist countries of the world, compared to our country. the freedom, which is the most important thing of all, they did not have as much as we do. and so, if we continue to let government decide all of our -- all of what the solutions are, we're going to have more and more problems, and it is going to end up in chaos and violence. host: alan, thank you for the call. "i did not think we have heard
the last of financial reform. still to come, credit fannie and freddie, credit card crash." the firing of general stanley mcchrystal, tuesday will bring the confirmation of general david petraeus. dozens of commanders have cycled through the top jobs in the u.s. command overseeing both wars. three of the commanders, including the recently dismissed general stanley mcchrystal, had been fired or resigned under pressure. history has a judge to many of them harshly. only general petraeus and general or the year note are widely praised as having mastered the complex mixture of skills that is required in running america's wars demands. next, a caller from oakland, california. what is on your mind? caller: good morning. i would like to say a few things. i hope i can get it all out. number one, i am black.
i am a democrat. you can call me a socialist or whateever. -- whatever. i do not know why race had to be an issue. republicans always say it is not their issue. nevertheless, i am black. i just wanted to say that -- there was a person in the last administration that succ deficits did not matter. you can guess who that was. the government, in terms of tax cuts, the large corporations do not pay taxes. the top 1% pay less taxes. -- less taxes than the small people in this country. for us to be fighting back and forth in a war between democrat and republican ideology on this side and ideology on the other side -- it is unfortunate that we can come together as people
of this great nation and work this thing out, get it on track, regardless of who is at fault. we know who is at fault, but we need to come together. i have a lot to say, but thank you for letting me say that part. host: thank you, renee. alex from hollywood, florida. caller: good morning. i just want to say that i agree with pretty much everybody that has been calling in and the twitter messages that you guys have been getting. there is a lot of good information about what is going on in the economy right now. i also wanted to comment. how do you guys feel -- now that tony fratto and ross eisenbrey -- the commented about the economy and how the bailouts
were needed. host: we will go to michael in minneapolis. good morning. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: yes. caller: i am a big-picture guy. i want to address 10 words. what can we not all get together? let's talk about 10 words. let's go back to the preamble of the constitution. let's talk about "establish justice, ensure tranquillity, provide --, and secure liberty." these words, whether you are this or that, we argue about -- what do you mean by establish justice? ensure tranquillity -- my
tranquillity is not insured. promote populous -- populace. ands get on the same page talk about these five and verbs and five -- five verbs and five nouns. to " bob dylan -- quote bob dylan, "i am on the pavement. let's think about the government." host: thank you. he says there is no possibility to restore the 8 million jobs lost in the great recession. he said they inherited "a god awful mess." there is no way to regenerate the men in -- the millions of dollars that was lost. the price -- the vice president stop off at a custards stand and had an exchange with the owner -- stopped off at a custard
stand and had an exchange with the owner. the next caller is from iowa. good morning. caller: being that wall street and the banking system was pretty much the cause of the collapse of the economy, why cannot make them turn around and pay off our deficit for the united states with their profits? also, with the problems we have at our borders with mexico, why can we not pull our military bases of all the european countries that we do not need to be in and move them to the border? we would have our border secured. that is the question i would like to have answered. host: from the headlines in canada as the g-20 summit wraps up today, preceded by the g-8 friday. "behind the black bloc."
it gives you a sense of security that is in place in toronto. the cost of the security is almost nine under million dollars. over 72 hours, that averages $7 million per hour. some are calling it the most expensive 72 hours in history. caller: good morning. i want to talk about the prior show that you had regarding the economy. i thought that the two economists were kind of shortsighted about the job growth in america recently. when you look at the economy and how -- the comparative advantages to produce goods and services in the u.s., you can look no further than china, who basically kill their offspring so that they can have a
comparative advantage to sell products in this country. germany, they do everything they can to take a paton's away from this country, make products -- take the patents away from this country, make the products, and if they do not like them, send them to china. we have a problem with japan who tends to compete with us. their deficit keeps blooming as well. i think that, if you do not hide the deficit into the job growth, -- tie the deficit into the job growth, then you are creating a policy in our economy. i was surprised that it did not show the growth of our deficit along with the job growth. that would show you a true picture of what is going on in our economy. host: thank you for your call.
somebody on our twitter page has posted this. you can see some of the video. the vice president was in milwaukee on friday. this is the custard shop that he visited. the owner said the custard was free, but he wanted lower taxes. this is from wisn. it is also on youtube. the front page of "the new york times," the latest deployment in afghanistan and the english but that families go through as -- the anguish that the families go through as a soldier heads off to war. this has been the deadliest month yet for troops in afghanistan. trevor is joining us from lake port california.
caller: good morning. thank you for having me on your show. i wish those troops the best. i have a light hearted note about the deficit that everyone keeps on talking about. i was thinking, the best way to solve the problem would probably be to sell the politicians to china. host: someone also made the comment on our twitter page. thank you for the call. next, a caller from wisconsin. good morning. caller: i have been trying to get through for a long time. this is my first time. i just wanted to call. i got a little flustered and off-course. this was classic republican strategy. he had to bring up the black -- the problem that black people have been calling. it is such a classic, republican scheme. host: that has no bearing --
whether you are black, white, or asian. that seemed to be dismissed pretty quickly. paula >> it was ridiculous, but they always seem to go that way -- caller: it was ridiculous, but they always seem to go that way. you could go the route of poor, white trash. there represented by billionaires'. they just cannot get it at all. -- they are represented by billionaires. they just do not get it at all. the republicans are holding up unemployment. the bill would give more money with the inheritance tax. nobody is bringing that up. they are trying to make more people rich on the backs of the poor and middle-class. hopefully, the republicans will do their homework. maybe they will see the light. host: more details on the financial, regulatory reform bill inside the "new york
times." the lobbying is shifting to regulations. it is up to federal agencies to carry out the mandate as indicated in that 2000-page document that is now the financial, regulatory reform bill. bharal from ohio -- bernie from ohio. color >> good morning. -- caller: good morning. i am one of those people that this is brian lamb should hhve a statue made it just outside of the window. host: i do not think he would want the statute, but i am in agreement here. -- statue, but i am in agreement here. caller: i have said for years that all of our governments need to hire the best public relations firm in the world. it seems like this anti- taxpaying is -- i do not want to pay any taxes, but i do want the fda to make sure my food is safe, i do want the service and
not service, water systems, good streets and roads -- it seems like we have done a lousy job of making sure the american people know what a good -- know what they get for their tax money. one of your guests talked about how much relief there would have been in this country if we had a single-payer health care system. the state and local governments that have to provide health care for the port -- it was eliminated in germany and france. it is not a problem in canada. there are so many things that could have been fixed. more importantly, if only our government would make sure that everybody knows at what they get for their tax money. host: thank you for call. "it will never be the same" -- that is a quote from those who lived through the exxon valdez oil spill.
another headline from detroit, "a public duty and a life lived in private." wife wasan conyers' sentenced to more than three years in prison. larry from baltimore. good morning. caller: good morning, sir. thank you very much for taking my call. i have a few comments. jobs -- we have a job problem in this country. we are well aware of it. the government does not do anything about the illegal immigration. there are over 35 million illegal immigrants in this country, and i am sure most of them are working. why will the government not do something about illegal immigration? the government, again, subprime loans and all of that -- it was
the government that forced the banks to give loans to people that could not afford to pay for them. you and i know that. the banks were smart enough to bundle some of these loans up and sell them overseas. that is why it became a world crisis. it was basically a u.s. cent housing bubble -- a u.s. housing bubble. the government forced banks to give loans to people. social security -- we have problems for social security. how many people are on social security that have never given one dime to social security? i will give you an example. gay people from mexico, over illegally -- come over illegally and they say they are being persecuted. it automatically get social security benefits. -- they it automatically get
social security benefits. i am a union worker. my money is going to so many different things. it is going into programs that i really do not agree with. host: thank you for your call. this was a comment on our earlier discussion dealing with the deficit, the debt, and the economy. "spent directly on jobs. jobs = revenue equals deficit reduction. jobs = increased gross national product = decrease deficit. -- deficit." what to do with the oil and waste that is coming ashore in the gulf of mexico? it is a day of prayer for the residents of mississippi, louisiana, alabama, and the florida gulf coast. first, we will look at some of the other topics and issues and guests that make up these
programs. caller: the topics will include the gulf coast oil spill, the change of command in afghanistan, and this week's confirmation hearings for general david petraeus and supreme court nominee elena kagan. "meet the on nbc's press" include john mccain and barbara lee, who chairs the congressional black caucus appeared on abc this week, white house correspondent -- black caucus. on abc this week, a white house correspondent. fox -- linda gramm, from south carolina, and california democrat dianne feinstein, chair of the senate intelligence committee. you'll hear boast -- host bob shaver -- schaffer.
you'll hear from patrick leahy and jeff sessions. on cnn -- the host will talk to guess including texas senator and new jersey democrat robert menendez. also, senate armed services committee jack reed, democrat from rhode island, and georgia republican, saxby chambliss. you can listen to all of those talk shows starting at noon eastern on c-span radio at 90.1 f.m. in the washington, d.c., area. you can listen live on the web at cspanradio.org. you can follow us on facebook and on twitter. >> tonight on c-span2's "book tv," sarah ellison.
after that, the discussion with the reporter who was caught for 45 days and kept in a cell. after that, bill bennett -- the author of more than 20 books for adults and children. you can run the entire schedule at booktv.org. join us on twitter. more than 30,000 viewers already have. >> what is the internet? monday, a look at the fcc's efforts to reclassify the internet with two members of the house communications subcommittee -- john shimkus and mike doyle. that is on "the communicators" on c-span2. >> this is a change in personnel, but it is not a change in policy. general petraeus fully participated in our review last fall. he both supported and helped
design a strategy that we have in place. >> learn more about the president's choice to head u.s. forces in afghanistan. general david petraeus has been on c-span more than 40 times. you can see his participation in those events any time at the c- span video library. it is washington, your way. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we want to welcome winston porter, president of the waste policy center. we want to focus on the issues in the gulf coast. the times picayune at this -- has this story. "it will never be the same" - is that a fair assessment? post -- guest: it is hard to say. there will certainly be a long period a thing as being just
shovelled. it is hard to say how long it will be. host: every day, about 15 truckloads is being sent about 150 miles from where it is found in the gulf to a landfill in florida. what is happening to that material? guest: at the epa and the states have authorized about one dozen landfills to take this material. having run that program at the epa, i can tell you these landfills are pretty safe. they have liners. they have special systems. you have to watch it carefully. you have to watch that the trucks do not durable material as they go. some of it may be in -- do not dribble material as they go. some of it may be in liquid form. we dispose of 350 million tons -- not pounds -- tons per year of solid waste in this country.
we have the capacity. there are good facilities, but you certainly have to watch them. host: it is clearly oil, but what else are the disposing of? guest: i suspect they are getting booms and various paper products that are used to sop up the various oil and materials. there are probably tar balls. they are also going to try to reduce as much oil as possible. that will be -- to reuse as much oil as possible. that will be mainly from the scanning operation. host: this article was from the carter administration. guest: we found there were a lot of sites around the country where people had dumped materials. whatever they did was not necessarily illegal at the time, but it was improper. the idea was to go in and clean up or deal with these hazardous- -pwaste sites. host: established in 1980 and
paid for companies -- paid by four companies responsible for the waste. the money ran out in 2003. where are we? guest: there are two types of money. most of the sites were being dropped -- dealt with directly by the companies that caused the problems. others are being cleaned up directly by -- about 75% of them are being cleaned up directly by the companies. there were additional moneys that did run out a number of years agoo we get $1.2 billion per year to deal with the superfund. money. probably enough people have given the impression that it is somehow running out of money, and it is not. host: our phone lines are open, divided among democrats, republicans, and third-parties. if you live in the gulf coast, the number is (202)628-0184.
over the short term -- the next six months -- what are we looking at in terms of cleanup operations, assuming they can cap the well within the next few weeks? guest: there will be a lot of work within -- along the shore line. a lot of use of dispersants. the big thing, obviously, right now is to get the oil stopped -- the oil coming into the gulf. there will be a long-term cleanup program of the oil in the water. host: there are just under 1300 superfund sites in the united states. there also 606 or and sites. what are those? -- there are also 606 orphaned sites.
what of those? guest: those are sites where we do not know who caused it. that's where we need the federal money because there is no one else to pay for it. host: once the site is fall, what happens next? there is no more room for any material? once they take the material from these look kosher -- from these locations -- guest: they go to other landfills. there are landfills that are preapproved to receive this material. i do not see that as being a great issue. there may be certain landfills of remorse -- that are better suited than others. host: wayne porter -- winston porter is the president of the waste policy center. good morning and welcome to "washington journal." caller: do you know anything about the incinerators that get rid of the leftovers like what
you're talking about? it disintegrates it, sort of. guest: you're talking about -- are you talking about the incinerators in the gulf coast oil spill? caller: all of the leftovers that they pick up on the edges and stuff. the oil that is left over. not just the skimmers, but the incinerators. guest: there are about 10 million gallons of oil that have gotten directly out to sea. there is also a burning of solid waste materials. most of that will go to landfills. there is some burning going on of those materials. i think it is probably going to be safe. host: this is from one of our regulars.
companies have stopped or underpaid, because they know the fed is a paper tiger. guest: they are trying to reauthorize the attacks of the superfund on two types of companies -- reauthorize the tax of the superfund auntie to be zero types of companies. one thing we learned about the superfund is that they're not caused by these kinds of companies, usually they are caused by all kinds of other people, including automobile companies and cities. they are trying to stick the bill to only two kinds of companies who are responsible for less than half of the superfund sites. i would like to see -- what we're doing now is a broad based appropriation from congress. this is a societal problem. we should stick it to ourselves,
so to speak. frankly, we need to get much more efficient and clean up these sites. i would be happy to expand on that. we need to do this more quickly. host: with regard to the oil, is there any way to recycle that? guest: absolutely. they are trying to capture as much oil. the stuff they skim up -- they are skimming up an oil and water mix. they will separate it out on land. what is separated will go to refineries. host: our guest is winston porter. next is kenneth from arkansas. good morning. caller: good morning. i have three points. host: could we have one at that
time? caller: last sunday, you had a preacher who preached a sermon that "words matter." it was really touching to me. this country is so consumed with hatred, you have a black president that is causing a lot of people who want their country back. i will tell you something about the gov. -- the gulf. it produces only 4% of our energy. if we produce 4% and use 25%, then the 4% could go on the world market -- there is no amount of drilling on the continental shelf to make us energy independent. guest: that is not bailiwick -- that is not my bailiwick, necessarily. when the wind, solar, oil, gas. i will not debate you on what is the right amount and the right place.
we need most of the energy we have in some mixture over the next years. host: iraq from atlanta -- ira from atlanta. good morning. caller: i have watched all of these newscasts. i was always fishing, skin diving, scuba diving -- all along the florida coast and the gulf coast. i'm really concerned about the gulf coast. all the way of to the panhandle, the panhandle where the water is relatively shallow. there are marshlands -- we used to call them flats. the archbishop mysteries -- a day are fish nursery's -- they are fish nurseries. they lay their eggs up there
-- just everything. the entire ecosystem comes from not gulf area. i have heard nobody -- from that fulg are -- gulf area. i have heard nobody talked about putting skimmer's out beyond that depth -- skimmers out beyond that debt. all of that stuff will be dead for decades. guest: that is a very good point. the gold is a huge nursery for various kinds of wildlife and fish -- gulf is a huge error sri for various kinds of wildlife and fish. they are trying to -- a huge nursery for various kinds of wildlife and fish. they're trying to get the well contained. we have to protect those as much as we can. those marshes and the fish
nursery's and et cetera. the local people -- i look on this as something the local, state, and federal people need to work on together. host: we have been traveling down to the gulf coast. here are some pictures you can see from our crews. workers are trying to clean up along the alabama, mississippi, louisiana coast. there are congressional hearings. the president made his statement. all of that is available on our c-span.org/oilspill website. ronald says, "what happens to the sea turtles during the burning of the oil at sea?" guest: i cannot precisely answer that. it passed to be monitored
closely. much of the burning will be on land, if there is going to be any. i would not think that would be a huge issue for the sea turtles, although i am certainly not a biologist. the epa is monitoring the air, water, and land. so far, my understanding is they are not seeing a lot of increase in pollution from burning and other things. host: the 1990 law that was passed after the exxon valdez indicated that the polluter pays. bp has said that it will pay. they have the $20 billion fund and the $100 million for others who are impacted by this. what is the ultimate cost? guest: it will be large. i have no good idea. probably $20 billion is in the right ballpark. to me, essenes to depend very greatly on how fast they can -- it seems to depend very greatly
on how fast they can tap the oil well. -- cap the oilwell. there are concerns with the hurricane season coming up. we have a good chance of tapping this thing quickly. i understand that people have said -- bp has said they are hoping to keep improving the capture of the material. they hope to capture more and more of that material. that is really fundamental. i have dealt with pollution all my life. capture everything you can at the source. do not let it in the internment to begin with. they have several bites of the apple -- in the environment to begin with. they have several bites of the apple. i think, so far, they have done a pretty good job of not letting a whole lot of material get to the beach is, per se. they are running to even. we have to really watch the weather.
host: john from augusta, georgia, on the republican line. caller: good morning. i had a question as i was reading. i heard that on the coast of florida there is nothing servicing them towards the coast. there is the potential of a methane explosion. i heard there are children getting respiratory problems because of the toxic gases flowing inland, rising from the water. that is how we get rain. will the oil evaporate into the air? host: i mentioned earlier -- guest: i mentioned earlier that the epa and others are trying hard and doing a good job of monitoring the air emissions. the crude oil is going to have such -- to some extent, it will
have lighter material coming off of it. the question is what the concentration is. i cannot speak to the issue, but it is important to monitor these issues and be sure that the-yes -- the gashes levels do not rise to a dangerous level -- the gaseous levels do not rise to a dangerous level. host: is at the same process to capture it and move it to a landfill? guest: not really. they buried a bunch of barrels which began leaking and bubbling up to the surface. there have been oil recyclers who became superfund sites because they do not do a good job. there have been battery recyclers who became superfund sites. nuclear-weapons plants. donnelley speaking, the material is in place -- generally speaking, the material is in
place. the epa tries to handle it in place so that it does not get shifted somewhere else. the difference here is that we will take a solid waste that we have used or collected from it and take it somewhere else to be managed. host: good morning and welcome to "washington journal." caller: i wanted to ask the guest if he was familiar with this work from funguy. guest: i do not think so. what is the issue? host: we will move on. good morning to you. welcome to the program. caller: good morning. i'm really concerned about this oil spill and how it affects the economy, the impact it will have on businesses in the gulf, and people's jobs being lost. this country is not being fixed.
they are not fixing the broken machine. you have all of these heads of state up in government, telling us that everything is going to be okay, things are improving. it is a falsehood. everything is not really being fixed here. we're being told things that are not the truth. what we have to do as people is go to the voting booths and unelect all the lawyers and the people that control these things. they are very crafty. baker -- they circumvent people. we have to get some poor people in office. let's get some for politicians who know what a dollar is worth. we're obviously spending trillions of dollars. we're going right into the hole with the whole country. this gulf oil spill just adds insult to injury. host: let me turn a sentiment into a question that you can answer. their superfund sites in every state except north dakota.
the obama administration is looking at a tax that would try to restore some of the funding for this. what type of tax? is the environment conducive to a tax on these companies? guest: i do not think it is. my concern is -- i testified earlier this week -- their taxing a very small part of the industry, which is unfair -- they are taxing a very small part of the industry, which is unfair. in my epa days, we finished over 1000 sites. i would like to see the epa and states bear down on the other sites. they're getting $1.2 billion a year to help with that. i would like to see that money focused on finishing sites, not just to keep adding bureaucracy to the program. host: our guest is winston
porter. he's the president of the waste policy center. you can get more at winporter.com. caller: good morning, sir. i have a question about the dispersants. you hear a lot about oil, oil du can see -- you can see. the dispersants are designed to break up that oil. there are very small droplets that are more difficult to see and fine. there is information coming out about the dispersants that showed them to be very harmful to the oceans and see life, and -- and sea life and plant life. has anything been looked into as far as what affect these dispersants could have on the environment and us as people? guest: dispersants are playing a
really important role. it will be a positive role when everything is settled. they're trying to break up the oil into smaller droplets so that it will not washup ashore. i ran across an interesting statistic. 45% of all of the oil spills in this country and 60% worldwide come from natural seepage of oil into the gulf and other places. there's a lot of oil seeping up every day. micro organisms have learned to biodegrade that stuff. it has been studied very carefully. epa has steadied at very carefully. -- studied it very carefully. it will take many years to make sure we know what happens to dispersants. in general, it was probably a wise decision within the time they had. host: the number of superfund
sites far exceeds the ability of the epa to clean them up. why not make the polluters pay? guest: some polluters pay twice. the oil and chemical industry -- they want to clean up their own site and pay for other sites they did not cause. i'm against that. i am all for having them pay with the ones that nobody is dealing with. 75% of the superfund sites are cleaned up by the responsible authority. the epa has been a very good job of enforcement of the superfund, so that the polluter is paying. where there is no polluter or they have skipped town, the rest of us have to take care of it. host: our guest is an expert on the superfund sites. he earned his doctorate from the university of california. he is the president of the waste policy center. keith is joining us from
hollywood, florida. good morning. caller: yes, i have a few comments. basically, i am wondering who makes these decisions on where the taxpayer dollars go? i was recently unemployed. i see that senate republicans are actually trying to put down a bill to extend unemployment. we're paying for the gulf spill, which we have nothing to do with. could you comment on that? guest: i think that is a good question. there is a mistaken premise here. from every thing i can gather, this bill will be paid by the polluters -- bp and perhaps other people are going to pay for the problem. i cannot guarantee there will be no tax money spent, there probably will be some. generally speaking, like the exxon valdez, the person who caused the spill has to pay for
the cleanup. host: good morning, mike. what are you seeing in your neck of the woods? caller: if you give me a couple seconds, i will give you background. i'm a deckhand on chartered fishing boats here. i've been working here for 15 or 16 years. i know this area well. i used to fish the rig that burnt up. i know that area where they are talking about the rigs or whatever they are shutting down for the time being. i do not think of ever heard what i am about to tell you on the news. it is not a revelation, but i never hear it. i'm going to say it because i have never heard it. when you hear about the people working on boats, skimming, they are 17 to 19 to 60 foot
boats. i see everyday the pass that you see on tv. there are small boats going out every day to do what they can do. i will start doing that next week. i have never done it before. it is all new to me. everything i hear from people doing it now, it is a show. it is not accomplishing anything. it is just a show. it is heartbreaking. you see this stuff on the beach. we know it could have been stopped way offshore, but it was not. i will be happy to get a paycheck. it is incredible to me that, with all the power this country has come and all the things we have done for other countries, that e could not have had, when the oil was way off shore, all the different people that wanted to help us. host: can you call us back in a couple of weeks and let us know how you made out?
caller: absolutely. -phost: thank you for your call. guest: there are about 6000 boats being used. i think we need all hands on deck. i realize the frustration about this. we do not want the awhile to get on shore -- the oil to get on shoer. -- shore. we will probably find a lot of things we could have streamlined and done better when we look back on this. more effective skimming could be one thing. go out and give it your best shot. we do need to keep it offshore. that is an important. we could probably have done better. we can do better in the future. we do not want it to get on shore and into the marshes. host: the cleanup in the gulf coast is our topic. we're getting information from winston porter about this issue.
he has a website, winporter.com. elaine from ohio, good morning. caller: i want to talk about the true facts. it is 26% of the oil that comes from the gulf. i want to talk about the news yesterday. we had a major protest -- they had a major protest on beaches. people were holding hands across the country. there were signs, "stop the drilling," "no drilling means no spills." after the protest, i watched every single person get in their cars, turn on the a/c, and they were hypocritical.
i do not think they realize that we could stop the drilling in the -- if we stopped the drilling in the gulf, we would lose so many jobs. the six-month moratorium -- we're paying almost $3 per gallon. do you see prices getting worse? what do you feel about obama temporarily canceling the jones act? guest: as a general matter, we'll need oil for gas for a long time in this country. we need to do it safely. there was no instance of any significance or grade students in the gulf for the past 60 years. -- great significance in the gulf for the past 60 years. we need to use oil and gas effectively and safely. i would hate to see is take the option of the table, because i
think we're going to need it. host: the epa is a hollow joke that, in most cases, protect the corporate polluters and passes the cost to the taxpayers. guess: i worked at epa for four years. i was a reagan appointee. i have dealt with them ever since then. i will say this about the epa and superfunds law -- it is a very tough enforcement law. i cannot say no mistakes have been made. it is not just a matter of throwing away taxpayer money. it is going after the people who made -- to cause the problem in using federal money where there is no one to be found. host: edward, good morning. go ahead. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. this country fights wars all over the world, saying they are protecting people. if you look at the niger delta, the u.k. has consistently
dumped on people's farmland and conclude -- and completely polluted the area. the rest of the world has closed their eye to it for many years. they have dumped oil on these people's properties, in their water source, in their food. children's faces blistered from the contaminants from the oil that breaks down. guest: i am not sure of what you're talking about. we certainly have pollution issues here and around the world. the u.s. probably does the best job of any country of improving our quality of life from a pollution standpoint. we have to be continuously vigilant. i do not think the answer is always more law and more regulation. you get pretty bureaucratic after a while. it is very important for people
to be involved in these issues. if something is going on, they need to talk to the city and state and federal government to deal with the problems. host: one comment from our twitter page, "why has not winston mentioned the kevin costner fix that bp signed on to?" guest: there is a device to separate the oil from the water. i do not know the details. the problem is, they sound good on paper, but they may not work on well life- -- in real life. there are various skimmers and some of them do a very good job of keeping quayle and water -- taking oil and water onboard. you have to separate the oil out to take to a refinery.
they are weighing the options. we will be better prepared in the future. we're using fairly old technology. the use of dispersants is nwe. -- new. host: our last caller. good morning. caller: good morning. i live in biloxi. i see a lot of what is happening with bp. somebody told me a very disturbing thing. they say bp will not cap the well because if they do they will lose the lease. they are waiting for the relief wells to be opened. guest: i did not understd